Author Topic: [NEWS] DEA declares marijuana has no medical benefit, will remain illegal  (Read 9922 times)

I dunno about you but if we legalized it it would have to be taxed and here in Arizona it may have to shoot up in price way more than $10/g

The thing is, is that if it's wholly legalized, more people will want to get into the industry. This will make the market competitive, and prices will reflect that. Might even offset the tax, so it might end up still being $10/g, or less.

The thing is, is that if it's wholly legalized, more people will want to get into the industry. This will make the market competitive, and prices will reflect that. Might even offset the tax, so it might end up still being $10/g, or less.
fair point

I dunno about you but if we legalized it it would have to be taxed and here in Arizona it may have to shoot up in price way more than $10/g
No, I'm saying enforcement of drug laws costs a ton of tax money

No, I'm saying enforcement of drug laws costs a ton of tax money
i don't know the statistics but it's obvious that legalizing recreational marijuana would save millions instead of spending on incarcerating individuals for possession of said drug / paraphernalia.

i don't know the statistics but it's obvious that legalizing recreational marijuana would save millions instead of spending on incarcerating individuals for possession of said drug / paraphernalia.
the prison industry is literally an industry
no money's being saved but money is being made

yeah unfortunately we get too much money by locking up people for undeserving crimes to legalize it as a country any time soon

the prison industry is literally an industry
no money's being saved but money is being made
adding onto this thought, do you think it's morally and/or financially worth it to incarcerate people for this 'crime' and being forced to have a criminal record for a petty crime like possession?

i've seen people claim that nationwide legalization would greatly overrun the profits that possession/paraphernalia incarceration brings in, but frankly have no clue if thats true. can anyone confirm / deny

I don't think there's a slippery slope in the government saying you're not allowed to drive high-speed machines without safety precautions.
I think the amount of regulation we have is already proof enough that it's a slippery slope for them to enforce safety regulations. But that's just me. I don't know how the world would be without them so I'll never know if I'm right or not.

how else would they arrest so many poor people if weed became legal??
We could try just making being poor illegal like it used to be.

adding onto this thought, do you think it's morally and/or financially worth it to incarcerate people for this 'crime' and being forced to have a criminal record for a petty crime like possession?

i've seen people claim that nationwide legalization would greatly overrun the profits that possession/paraphernalia incarceration brings in, but frankly have no clue if thats true. can anyone confirm / deny

Well if you want to compare the money the taxes made for Colorado in a year, and multiply it by 50, you might get some figures to compare against prison money figures for a year.

the prison industry is literally an industry
no money's being saved but money is being made
But that money comes from government funding (taxes), which could be better spent elsewhere
Just looking at prisons, you're only looking at a portion of the costs. you have to actually bring those people to the prisons.
And there's still more on top of that

All to accomplish exactly nothing

Watch the video I linked earlier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJUXLqNHCaI

having the DEA, who makes billions of dollars off of having marijuana illegal, make the decision to keep marijuana illegal, is a very direct conflict of interest and should have been given to the FDA instead.

having the DEA, who makes billions of dollars off of having marijuana illegal, make the decision to keep marijuana illegal, is a very direct conflict of interest and should have been given to the FDA instead.
Honestly the FDA would just say no as well. They claim that cannabis edibles are bad because 'muh children' but proceed to approve candy flavored amphetamines.
http://hightimes.com/news/fda-approves-candy-flavored-amphetamines-for-kids/
http://www.healthnutnews.com/fda-approves-candy-flavored-amphetamines-kids/
They don't care about the people, they just want the money. Which is ironic because they are losing out on a multi-billion dollar industry that could not only help the country financially but cut down on thousands of deaths caused by pharmaceuticals.


The difference being that that only occurs in people with "a certain predisposition". Milk, nuts, and wheat can all kill or harm people with "a certain disposition", yet all those substances are free to be bought.
Except we have absolutely no idea what the predisposition that causes it is or where to look even, while allergic reactions are understood and, in most cases, less severe than lasting/life-long psychological disabilty.